Film Study: Washington Huskies’ Defense Swallows Stanford|Washington Hot Topics|Team BattleGround|College BattleGround

How the hell did they do that?

The Huskies played their game of the season last Friday night, and while they may not have such a near-perfect effort again, they dominated Stanford by simply playing sound, physical football. Before we begin clearing a space in the trophy case for the BCS crown, we should consider that Stanford may not have a terrific offense. Their QB came into the game 13th in passing yards in the Pac-12, and concerns about the Cardinal offensive line were voiced before the game.

Still, teams have not done what Washington did to Stanford in the David Shaw era. Today we’ll shed some light on why the Dawgs were so dominant on the defensive side of the ball.

2nd and 11:

This first play is an I-formation power lead. It’s similar in design to the power runs Lavon Coleman used against Arizona for so much success, in that there’s a pulling guard from the left side leading a back through the hole on the right. This particular version of it would have been something the Green Bay Packers used in winning back-to-back Super Bowls in the 1960’s.

This play, from this formation, is the height of Stanford’s offensive arrogance. I don’t mean that in a bad way, to be clear. Typically, the I-formation has two receivers (one to each side), with a tight end, and two backs behind the QB. In this case, Stanford has removed the receiver (the flanker) from the offense’s right side and replaced him with an additional tight end. What makes this play “arrogant” is that the second tight end is on the line of scrimmage, which makes the tight end inside of him an ineligible receiver (only the furthest-out man from the ball on the line of scrimmage is allowed to move beyond the line of scrimmage on a pass play). This play is a bludgeoning tool. Stanford is perfectly content to telegraph the run by formation and alignment, and then run this play over, and over, and over again until the defense stops it; and then run it a few more times to make sure that first stop wasn’t just a fluke. Somewhere in the middle there they’ll run the pass compliment out of it, which is a bootleg or half-roll to the right side, with the tight end, fullback and halfback running a multi-layered flood route to the right side, and the receiver on the left either running a post or deep drag back to the right. This is a play that is both mentally and physically draining on a defense (when it works); you know what’s coming, but there’s nothing you can do to stop it.

Two things make this play. The first is Sidney Jones’ willingness and ability to neutralize the lead block of the fullback, well behind the line of scrimmage. One of two things happened here with Jones; either Stanford ran this play in to a well-timed run blitz by the Huskies, or the defensive key on this play was for Jones to attack the backfield due to the formation, with the knowledge that the safety (Budda Baker) and the linebackers would be available and able to neutralize the threat of the pass. Either way, he takes out the lead blocker.

The second key is that Psalm Wooching is able to defeat the block of the tight end (#96) over the top of him, and then to suck up the block of the pulling guard as well, keeping him from getting to the second level linebackers and leaving them free to get the glory of making the tackle. Stanford’s right tackle initially gets a good block on Elijah Qualls, but Qualls keeps his feet and is able to assist on the tackle. Had the timing of the play been better from the standpoint of the offense, Qualls would’ve been a non-factor. Greg Gaines more than does his job by taking on the down-blocking right guard and pushing him backward into the hole, creating traffic for the running back to negotiate.

This was man-on-man football, and the Huskies won pretty handily.

Here you can really see the aggressiveness of the UW secondary in run support, and how stout Wooching was at the point of attack. Azeem Victor reads the flow of the play and takes away the outside run from McCaffrey. Great hustle by Qualls as well.

3rd and 11:

This play is an “end-tackle twist” on the left side of the Huskies’ defense, on an obvious passing down. Instead of rushing straight up the field on the snap, Elijah Qualls works to the outside and attacks Stanford’s right tackle. The right guard also steps out with Qualls, failing to notice Psalm Wooching patiently waiting on a looping upfield rush. As soon as the guard fully commits to double-teaming Qualls, he creates a lane for Wooching to cut inside and straight to the quarterback. Wooching is far enough upfield before coming back inside to the QB that he’s outside the fullback’s (#82) field of vision. The fullback notices him far too late to actually do anything to affect Wooching’s rush.

Wooching gets the stats on this play, but the key here is actually the rush ability of Elijah Qualls, and the respect Stanford shows his ability to rush the passer. Had Stanford’s right guard known that the tackle could handle Qualls, he would’ve held his position in the pocket, and been in position to pick up Wooching’s late rush.

Watch Stanford’s right tackle’s (#77) head; the outside rush of Wooching plus the outside release of Qualls puts him in stress. The right guard fails to engage Qualls in any meaningful way at the snap, and then chooses to follow Qualls up the field instead of looking for a rusher coming through his zone. You can see him realize that mistake, just a moment too late.

2nd and 6:

Stanford tries to get fancy, and it blows up in their collective faces.

The Tree really try to sell the run to their left, pulling both guards as lead blockers. But this play is dead from jump street, as Conner O’Brien gives a clinic in “How to Play Outside Containment While Not Getting Blown up by a Quarterback’s Block” that he may autograph and <a href="